Little heat left in David Cameron's hottest potato

Graphic on right shows the correspondence with David Heathcoat Amory MP and William Hague in which the Shadow Foreign Secretary promises an exit that will take months not years.  Click image to enlarge >>>

A large number of Europhiles attended yesterday's ceremony to sign 'The 2009 Declaration'.  Sceptics were notable for their absence.  Ken Clarke sat in the front row.  David Curry and Ian Taylor sat behind a row of journalists.  They - rather than the sceptics - are much happier at the 'delayed fulfilment' of David Cameron's EPP pledge.  One aide to a Europhile MP told me that he was confident that Conservative MEPs would never leave the EPP.  I paraphrase...

"In six months we have persuaded the leader to abandon his 'months, not years' pledge... William Hague used the cover of the outcome of the Czech election results to abandon that pledge... There are likely to be plenty of bigger 'events' in the next three years that can be used to wriggle out of the new pledge."

Eurosceptic MEPs tempted to leave the EPP now have been warned that they will lose the party whip.  The Times does not expect a major rebellion.  One Eurosceptic MEP, Geoffrey van Orden said “I am not happy, but I recognise the reality of the situation.”  Another, Nirj Deva, said: “I am deeply disappointed but I will just have to be patient.”  That's the view of The Telegraph's David Rennie, too:

"This afternoon it is proving hard to get a quick answer out of the MEPs who wrote to David Cameron last month, hinting they might simply walk away from the EPP if they did not get a binding commitment that a new group would be in existence by September.  One of them has just told me that he is disappointed about a 2009 date, but can live with it, and certainly has no intention of leaving the EPP and sitting on the independent benches, better known as the home of fringe extremists like Jean-Marie Le Pen, the French National Front leader."

Team Cameron will be delighted at the way they have defused a potentially explosive row.  The EPP issue was David Cameron's hottest potato and there will be some quiet satisfaction within the leader's circle at the way the last 24 hours have gone.  Early yesterday morning the leader and his team started working the phones.  Key Eurosceptics, EU enthusiasts and leading figures of the party were given special pre-briefings.  William Hague gave his interview to this site.  At 9.30am David Cameron gave what was widely reported as an "assured" performance to MPs.  He was speaking at a meeting that - almost without precedent - was chaired by the Chief Whip rather than the Chairman of the 1922 backbench committee.  The Chief Whip, in charge of calling speakers, carefully ensured the first MPs to speak at the meeting were supportive of the leader.  This morning's Telegraph, as would be expected, is disappointed at the delay to the pledge but The Daily Mail is supportive (see frontpage newslinks).  There may be some flak in the Sunday newspapers but Team Cameron have good reason to believe that Labour and Lord Levy have much more to worry about...

Comments

[Anoneumouse]

Oh boy, in 50 years, the only time I have ever voted for any other political party than Conservative, was at the last EU elections.

Guess what.............from now on, it is any party other than Conservative.

It is a well known fact, that the conservatives lost the last general election because of the Eurosceptic vote.

Battersea (Lab hold) Majority: 163 – UKIP: 333
Burton (Lab hold) Majority: 1,421 – UKIP plus Veritas: 1,825
Carshalton & Wallington (LD hold) Majority: 1,068 – UKIP: 1,111
Cornwall North (LD hold) Majority: 3,076 – UKIP plus Veritas: 3,387
Dartford (Lab hold) Majority 706 - UKIP: 1,407
Eastleigh (LD Hold) Chris Huhne Majority: 568 – UKIP: 1,669
Gillingham (Lab hold) Majority 254 – UKIP 1,191
Hereford (Lab hold) Majority: 962 – UKIP: 1,030
High Peak (Lab hold) Majority: 735 – UKIP 1,106
Hove (Lab hold) Majority 420 - UKIP 575
Medway (Lab hold) Majority: 213 - UKIP 1,488
Portsmouth North (Lab hold) Majority: 1,139 - UKIP 1,348
Romsey (LD hold) Majority 125 – UKIP: 1,076
Sittingbourne & Sheppey (Lab hold) Majority: 79 UKIP plus Veritas: 1,118
Solihull (LD Gain) Majority: 279 – UKIP: 990
Somerton & Frome (LD hold) Majority: 812 – UKIP plus Veritas: 1,531
Staffordshire Moorlands (Lab hold) Majority: 2,438 – UKIP: 3,512
Stroud (Lab hold) Majority: 350 – UKIP: 1,089
Stourbridge (Lab hold) Majority: 407 – UKIP: 1,087
Taunton (LD gain) Majority: 573 – UKIP: 1,441
Thanet South (Lab hold) Majority: 664 – UKIP (Nigel Farage) 2,079
Torbay (LD hold) Majority: 2,029 - UKIP 3,726
Warwick & Leamington (Lab hold) Majority: 306 – UKIP: 921
Watford (Lab hold) Majority: 1,148 – UKIP: 1,292
Westmorland & Lonsdale (LD gain) Majority: 267 – UKIP: 660

[Yet Another Anon]

certainly has no intention of leaving the EPP and sitting on the independent benches, better known as the home of fringe extremists like Jean-Marie Le Pen, the French National Front leader."
They wouldn't be affiliated to them though even though they were sitting on the same benches, the whole point about the Independent Benches is that they are there for groups not at that moment affiliated to anyone else - in The House of Commons the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and Nationalist groups and Unionist Parties and Independents including on the rare occassions he is there, George Galloway all sit on those benches. It isn't like a divorce where people live seperated in the same house because usually the reason for that is that there is nowhere else for the person to live in the short term - the Conservatives would still have seating on the Independent benches and offices in the interim, it's not as if they would have to stand or hang about outside the chamber or anything like that!

[Martin]

Hmmm, let's just leave aside the question of whether all the UKIP voters would otherwise have voted Tory, and the fact that a more eurosceptic stance would have lost some votes as well as gained others .

Even then you have only listed 18 seats here won by Labour. So if we had won them instead, Labour would still have had a majority of 31.

So much for your "well known fact".

[Yet Another Anon]

It is a well known fact, that the conservatives lost the last general election because of the Eurosceptic vote.
It is not clear how many of those voting UKIP or Veritas would have voted Conservative if there had not been Euro-Realist candidates to vote for, indeed Veritas mostly targeted former Labour supporters, even if everyone who had voted Veritas or UKIP had voted Conservative, Labour would still have scraped a majority and the Conservative Party would still have been a long way away from even being the largest party - UKIP got 2.5% of the vote and Veritas got 0.3% of the vote, even if all of those people had voted Conservative the Conservative Party would only have got 35.1% of the vote still slightly behind Labour.

[Old Hack]

Let's hope Team Cameron has now fully learned the dangers of indulging in 'me-tooism'.

If they hadn't nicked Liam Fox's point about leaving the EPP, which got him a cheap clap at conference, they wouldn't have got themselves into such a bother.

Mind you, I'm not holding my breath - with little by the way of beliefs or principles Team Cameron is far too prone to faddism and bandwagon hopping.

[sjm]

Sorry, but much as I'd love to think we lost the last election because we weren't hardline enough on the EU (and I'd love it if we left), the public weren't interested.
I know, because as a hands-on Association Chairman at the GE, we did lots of surveys and canvassed a very high proportion of the electorate, and Europe was nowhere on the radar for them. The fact that it should have been is neither here nor there.

Our candidate made it clear that he was a genuine Eurosceptic,but he won back the seat from Labour because he is a local guy who works hard and speaks a language his constituents understand on crime, health, education and immigration.

[william]

What if Labour's new leader is of the Tony Benn school, returning to traditional Labour euroscepticism, and dumping the new labour project? I might vote for that.

What if the BNP continues its surge, abandons its emphasis on race (or adopts a Lib Dem varied message strategy) and builds appeal to Conservative eurosceptics?

UKIP's about to select a new leader. I doubt whoever it is could possibly be as ineffective as Titford and Knapman have been. If it's Farage, he would ramp up the message. He's one of the best speakers in politics in all parties. Incidentally he wasn't far away from losing us Bromley. Had the EPP been a couple of weeks ago, we'd have lost the seat.

The EPP victory will prove electorally expensive no matter what opposition parties do to capitalise on our weakness. Bromley might just be the first when Conservatives just stay at home.

The EPP was Cameron's acid test. He's failed. Party members are not stupid. They can smell the rot in our centre.

There's still hope. Callanan, Hannan, Heaton-Harris have yet to report in. There might be one or two more MEP's we can be proud of other than Helmer, who will rebuild Conservative pride and keep the Conservative Party from further electoral collapse.

[Julian Morrison]

Like I said, the EU-federalists haven't given up. I suppose the best thing to do is to stop up escape routes by pushing for the pre-processing work of EPP exit to run as fast and deep as possible. That is, make sure enough investment is pushed into exit and aftermath that the europhiles are left saying "we have to throw away all that work as well as back out of a plainly worded promise". Give the bastards a steeper hill to climb.

[deborah]

They just don't get it, do they?

Blair sends the NatWest 3 to America and thinks it'll all blow over.
Likewise, Cameron breaks a pledge and thinks we'll carry on believing in him.

Like the majority of ordinary people, I just want leadership based on values.

Something has to change.

[JimJam]

Once again DC comes up trumps. The most of the posts above are from UKIP/Nulab interlopers.

[deborah]

dream on, JimJam

[william]

You wish

[Chad]

JimJam, 30% of tory members here voted for EU withdrawal in the conHome BetterOffOut poll.

Do you think they should quit the Tories and join UKIP?

[Chris]

What if Labour's new leader is of the Tony Benn school, returning to traditional Labour euroscepticism, and dumping the new labour project? I might vote for that.
Yes, lets all vote for higher taxes, and nationalisation of industry! Thats a smart plan, just because a few guys aren't changing where they sit in the EU.

Just because we remain within the EPP, doesn't mean the Conservative whip will necesarilly continue toorder our MEPs to vote inline with the EPP whips anyway.

There's still hope. Callanan, Hannan, Heaton-Harris have yet to report in. There might be one or two more MEP's we can be proud of other than Helmer, who will rebuild Conservative pride and keep the Conservative Party from further electoral collapse.
[sarcasm]You know whats odd, I always seemed to think that gaining votes, and gaining seats didn't mean electoral collapse, I mean we won an extra 300 in May. If this is true I sure as hell hope we don't win any seats in the next general election![/sarcasm]

William, I know the EU is important to you (It is after all mentioned in every single one of your posts), but you have to accept that despite what conspiracy theories you would like to believe, they simply aren't true. The Aachen Memorandum is a brilliant book, but I can't help but think you might have taken it just a tad too seriously.

As powerful as the EU is, it is after all supreme to all national parliament, the majority of people at a national level simply don't vote according to European issues *Cue Chad coming out and declaring this is about broken promises not what the promise was*. People are incredibly selfish, we think about which party can improve our lives. If one party is promising me free money, whilst another party is promising that I can't go to France without a visa, which way do you think I'm going to vote? People don't always look at the big picture, in terms of countrywide economics, they simply look at how their vote will affect their life.

[deborah]

People also think "Can I trust this guy to fulfil his promises?"

[Chris]

JimJam, 30% of tory members here voted for EU withdrawal in the conHome BetterOffOut poll.

Do you think they should quit the Tories and join UKIP?

Chad, 54% of non muslims and 30% of muslims believe the death penalty should be reinstanted for terrorists. Should they all vote for a new party I could form called "Kill them all"? By your logic I'd get a majority in the House of Commons.

[Chad]

Chris - it was a straight forward question. Do you think Tories who support eu withdrawal are in the wrong party?

Other Tories here have stated exactly that so I wondered if it was JimJam's view too.

[Tam Large]

Jim Jam - most of the posts come from FUTURE Ukip supporters, who have until now supported the Conservative Party in the misguided notion that promised change was more than just cynical lip-service. Now we have little option but to go to a different Party: one which fights for the things we believe in.

In spite of our misplaced hopes of the Conservatives, it is clear there are now (still) three europhile parties plus one Party (Ukip) which is willing to speak the truth about the EU and its devastating effect on our people and their freedoms. Conservative MEPs who wish to speak out will now be gagged even more thoroughly by the EPP & Cameron.

From now on any sceptical utterance from the Leader of the Cameron Party (I can't bring myself to call it Conservative any more) will be greeted with the scepticism and contempt it deserves. It will not be long before non-MEPs will be disciplined for expressing their eurosceptic views as well.

This man is so strongly europhile that although he claims to be an environmentalist, he will not oppose the Common Fisheries Policy, which destroys marine life on an industrial and organised scale, in case it upsets his federalist EU friends by rocking the boat... The writing is on the wall chaps.

[kingbongo]

Rightly or wrongly this didn't even make the BBC news last night at 10 O'clock. Cameron has moved things on.

He should be given credit for doing more than any other tory party leader for doing something about the EPP. As for changing votes at a GE it won't make the slightest bit of difference whether we are in the EPP or not most people just couldn't care less (which is why I still don't understand why our MEPs don't just leave anyway).

I can't work out why Roger Helmer is singled out as a bad guy but DOCTOR Caroline Jackson is allowed to swan around saying all sorts of things about the leadership which prove she doesn't belong in the Conservative Party and should have the whip and her membership removed.

This annoys me much more than whether we are in the EPP for another 3 years, especially as she's supposedly one of my MEPs!

[EdR]

Some news-following, moderately political Conservative members I asked recently still don't know what the EPP is, let alone what it stands for or why it is important. If UKIP can get over the eyes-glazing-over factor in explaining it to the electorate, good luck to them. Cameron has committed to much more eurosceptic line of engagement with the EU than has been British government policy in many years.

Incidentally, Chad, I suspect we would be better off out of Europe and I voted accordingly in the poll. If Cameron proposed it and could actually, genuinely sell it to the public, I'd be very enthusiastic. But I would rather gouge out my eyes with a stale baguette than join UKIP's ragtag band of mouth-frothing ex-socialists, soft-nationalists, disaffected politicians (and Simon Heffer) who can't hack it the big boys' league and so content themselves trying to fracture and destroy the Eurosceptic vote from the periphary.

[Chris]

Chad, the Conservative party is, has and always will be a coalition of minds from all ends of the political spectrum, disagreement on issues within the party is good, because it enables us to find a solution that suits everyone. If everyone was in agreement, then the policies become extreme, and even more extreme as time goes on. I don't think they're in the wrong party, simply because its very hard to be in the wrong party. No party is ever going to conform exactly to your ideals, if they say they are, then you're either being manipulated or the party is following the old Lib Dem trick of a different manifesto for every person.

I really hate it when people tell others on this site to leave th paty and join another one, because quite simply its being pathetic and childish. In the big bag world of business you don't always find people share exactly the same view as you, so why should it be like that in politics? If we all split into parties focussed on single issues, then we'd end up with something like Italy's legislature where I can't even remember the number of parties that exist, and every vote is first a fight within a coalition and then a fight with the other coalition.

[Chad]

"But I would rather gouge out my eyes with a stale baguette than join UKIP's ragtag band of mouth-frothing ex-socialists, soft-nationalists, disaffected politicians (and Simon Heffer"

I agree Ed!

Fortunately change is in the air, hence why I have joined to try and help force that change. Take a look at David Campbell-Bannerman's positive, small government, small c conservative manifesto. He is an ex-Tory (but with a positive not rabid anti-Tory approach thank the starts) and ex-chairman of the Bruges group.

I'm interviewing David for ukiphome this weekend so if you would like to ask a question, just mail me.

[william]

The problem is Chris that the modernisers' strategy is based entirely on the belief that Conservative voters have nowhere else to go. If the 30% who want out of the EU feel that they have been disenfranchised, they will certainly be looking at altenatives.

If other parties are intelligent enough to get their appeal to this market right, the Conservative Party is vulnerable.

At Bromley 55% of Conservatives did not vote. If the EPP decision had been out that week, we would have lost the seat for sure.

I know it sounds odd to begin with, but many Conservative voters would actually prefer nationalised railways to EUised Britain.

If money is the price of freedom, I'll pay it with pleasure. Once freedom is secure, then I'll fight to get money right. But what Cameron and you seem to be forgetting is that freedom is of a higher value than money. People will risk their lives to secure their freedom.

Money's a lesser price to pay. I'm for McDonnel.

[Chad]

really hate it when people tell others on this site to leave th paty and join another one

Me too Chris, that's why I was seeking to see in JimJam was one of this group.

BetterOffOut has brought both Tory and UKIP eurosceptics togethers and shows that cross-party cooperation can work.

[william]

Yes, Chad. Let's ask Francis Maude if we can put UKIPPERS on the A-List, and hand them a few seats.

[Chris]

The problem is Chris that the modernisers' strategy is based entirely on the belief that Conservative voters have nowhere else to go. If the 30% who want out of the EU feel that they have been disenfranchised, they will certainly be looking at altenatives.

If other parties are intelligent enough to get their appeal to this market right, the Conservative Party is vulnerable.

At Bromley 55% of Conservatives did not vote. If the EPP decision had been out that week, we would have lost the seat for sure.
I presume you have the relative polling data to back up your claims? Bromley was case of voters not bothering, because they lived in a safe seat, and they'd rather have strawberries and cream whilst watching Wimbledon than treck to the polling station. Had the 55% of former Conservative voters opted for UKIP, or the ED or Labour or The Lib Dems then there might be grounds for wild claims that it was all about the EU. As it stands I and most others are simply dismissing it as voter apathy in a safe seat. Anyway, you'v still to point out to anyone how remaining in the EPP for 3 years means I'm going to be flying an EU flag on my house by 2010.

[Richard]

"Caroline Jackson is allowed to swan around saying all sorts of things about the leadership"

When will these people accept that they're an unrepresentative minority within both the Conservative Party and the country as a whole? They're entitled to their views but I wish they'd stop trying to dictate party policy or speaking out of turn.

[Chris]

BetterOffOut has brought both Tory and UKIP eurosceptics togethers and shows that cross-party cooperation can work.
This is exactly the way we should be tackling the EU situation, allowing individual MPs and MEPs make up their mind without the party dictating to them their position. It also stops pointless party jumping over single issues. These organisations are effectively caucuses, and should be encouraged.

[deborah]

Bromley was case of voters not bothering, because they lived in a safe seat, and they'd rather have strawberries and cream whilst watching Wimbledon than treck to the polling station

Yep, there's an ostrich if ever I saw one.

[MH]

I am so depressed by this news. I didn't vote for Dave and accept the clear majority did. I have no agreed with much of what he has done since he became leader, but I though there was some plan. This decision shows that his EPP pledge was nothing more than a cynical ploy to get the backing of the Right at a time in the leadership election when he needed it. The man is a liar, plain and simple. He also has one fewer party member today as I have torn up my membership card in disgust.

[william]

Chris you are mixing up the thread of my argument. I said that Bromley showed a reluctance to vote on the part of Conservatives. That reluctance was either because they spent an entire day eating strawberries several weeks before Wimbledon, or because they were unhappy with Cameron and the modernisers.

It was after that initial statement that I came onto Europe. Had the EPP decision been taken prior to Bromley (and it was no doubt carefully pushed out of that period) the stay at home Conservative non-vote might well have been bigger. Also Mr Farage might have managed to get a bit more oxygen into his campaign. If 300 odd votes had changed sides, or 600 more stayed at home, Bromley would have been lost

The point I'm making is that Cameron is intentionally refusing to represent the views of the majority of Conservatives based on the strategic plan that he will attract others to the party especially from Lib Dem, and that the current Conservative voters have nowhere else to go.

This strategy is a backwards-looking strategy. In the past Conservatives have had nowhere else to go.

The issue of Europe is significant in that it is an acid test issue for many Conservatives, and over it Conservatives have shown themselves willing to abandon their traditional loyalty, as UKIP demonstrates.

If UKIP had not been such an incompetently run affair, it would have done us far more damage. We have been most fortunate that Nattrass' cabal seized control and ran the party from his business premises in Birmingham, upsetting allcomers by rigging all internal elections etc, including their best electoral asset Kilroy Silk.

Next time the Conservatives' luck might not hold. Threats could come from a rejuvenated UKIP with new leadership, or from Labour's left wing winning control of the Party with a eurosceptic policy that appeals to people like me. Or possibly a surging BNP.

At current growth rate, by the next Euro elections, the BNP's support could be 2X or 2.5X what it is now. They need only tidy up their image to make it less labour voter targetted and more Conservative-voter targetted and they could make inroads.

I think Cameron could still get away with all his modernising, with traditional Conservative voters backing him if he delivered a convincing eurosceptic platform. This is the key area of Cameron's vulnerability. Sadly he's given Hague the opportunity to mess it up for him, which Hague has done. The Conservative vote at this moment has become extremely vulnerable.

Unless some more MEP's stand aside from the stitch-up and brave the threat of deselection, I don't see much hope. Cameron actually needs more Helmers to keep this wing of his party onside. If he kills off all hope, he will suffer the consequences next time he wants votes. Hannan would be helping Cameron by striking out alone.

[johnC]

I just hope that the party leadership in general and William Hague in particular don't think that having kicked this problem into touch they can now ignore it until 2009. They need to keep working hard to build up the new coalition in the European Parliament. And all prospective candidates for 2009 should be required to clearly support the decision to leave the EPP. The Eurofederalist MEPs have 3 years to clear their desks.

[Nigel C]

I am hoping to get some new Conservative members in my local village. When I knock on doors and people say "Cameron is just like all politicians you can't trust him to keep his promises" what should I say?

Maybe I won't go and knock on the doors after all. Maybe I will still vote Conservative but won't bother canvassing any more. How many activist now feel like this?

Please give me something I can believe in and sell; some fundamental principles about trust and promises. Something that says we are not all spin; that we are different; that we have changed.

While the avergae voter might not worry too much the average activist and party worker needs to believe in the leadership.
I voted for Cameron; I still have some hope he will deliver but it is wearing thin.

By the way Harlow was lost to Labour by 92 votes as Robert Halfon fought off UKIP and Veritas candidates and the Respect party did not field a candidate. Add that to the list.

[william]

3 years is bollocks. and we know it. cameron needs hannan to rescue his standing with Conservative voters urgently....

We could raise funds by selling a new confectionery brand - William Hague Fudge....strapline - Suck On That.

[deborah]

As the old advert went:
A finger of fudge is just enough to give UKIP a treat.......

sorry, couldn't resist it.

[Jan Ilczyszyne]

Don't hold your breath in anticipation of the revolution. Deva and Van Orden have already accepted the compromise, and Callanan, Kamall and Heaton-Harris (selected in Daventry) are all A-listers with a firm eye on their future Westminster careers. Listen to the radio airwaves - all other Conservative MEPs (save Caroline Jackson) have enthusiastically backed Cameron - so the only question remaining is whether Dan Hannan backs down yet again as he did in 2004 when required by Michael Howard and Liam Fox to sign up to the 2004-2009 EPP manifesto pledge

[Richard North]

Media coverage in Poland is very hostile to the Tories over the EPP issue. It is unlikely, therefore, that they will be disposed to join any Tory-led grouping in 2009.

Further, this is the second time that the Tories have pulled this stunt and they have acquired a reputation for inconstancy, which means that many of the right-wing parties from the smaller states will be reluctant to cast their lot with the Tories.

Caroline Jackson may well be right, therefore, in saying that the Tories will find it hard to form a new group in 2009.

Given that Cameron has reneged on his "weeks not months" pledge, and the Europe-wide lack of trust (one should not just think domestically here) there is no reason for believing that the current Tory pledge to form a new group is any more firm than the last one.

It is quite possible to foresee that, in the post-election process, when the parties are negotiating to form groups, the Tories will finds themselves in a similar position - without a sufficient number of partners - and thus be forced to go crawling back to the EPP.

What Cameron has done, therefore, is make a "guarantee", which - like his leadership pledge - he cannot necessarily deliver.

I think it is the British military who define "experience" as the ability to recognise a mistake, the second time you make it. By that token, we cannot even call Cameron, "experienced".

[michael mcgough]

There may be little heat left on the surface but the fire still burns.With three years until the next euro elections and maybe less until the next general ,can a leader survive that long by keep issuing threats to his team ?

[Denis Cooper]

So, this agreement with the Czech ODS to form a new grouping in 2009 - is there anything in it which says the Tory MEPs MUST NOT leave the EPP before then?

[Denis Cooper]

Well, here it is:

http://www.conservatives.com/pdf/JointDeclaration.pdf

QUOTE

A Joint Declaration

As the leaders of the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom and the Civic Democratic party of the Czech Republic we jointly declare:

That together with other like-minded parties of other nations, including both existing and candidate members of the European Union, we will found the Movement for European Reform, dedicated to the ideals of a more modern, open, flexible and decentralised European Union, ready to face the challenges of the 21st century and;

That at the commencement of the next legislature period of the European Parliament, following the elections in 2009, our elected members will establish a new parliamentary group, which other like-minded parties will be invited to join, and whose purpose will be to give leadership and representation to these ideals.

UNQUOTE

So this agreement imposes no restrictions at all on what either the Tory or ODS MEPs do in the meantime, and for the Tory MEPs that means they should leave the EPP immediately and sit as independents.

[christina speight]

Spineless lot the Tory eurosceptics and led by a LIAR assisted by a Hague-traitor .

That's the last I'll have to do with the Tories

[Jack Stone]

Christine all I can say about that comment is Thank God for that!

[Political Thinker]

I think there are three issues here we mustn’t lose sight of.

- Firstly, Cameron must deliver on his pledge to leave the EPP to ensure that the Conservative Party stays united. While it is important that he improves our image and generally speaking modernises the party, he must keep traditional right-wing Tories happy, and if leaving the EPP is the way to do so, then so be it.

- Secondly, it’s also an issue about trust and I’m sure he realises this. The reason why a lot of floating voters like him is because of his fresh and youthful image, and they also believe they can trust him. He knows he mustn’t lose this trust.

- Thirdly, I think it’s very important that Eurosceptics within the party don’t cause more trouble than is necessary. Yes, it’s vital that Cameron delivers on his pledge, however we cannot be seen to be fighting yet again about Europe and again be the divided party. The amount of progress we have made since the 2005 General Election is far too much to squander now.

I myself would much rather we leave the EPP now rather than later, however too much is at stake to simply ruin everything over a small delay regarding who our MEPs are aligned to in Europe.

[malcolm]

Yesterday I posted 4 times asking anybody to enlighten us as to what benefits being in the EPP had brought to Britain.With the honourable exception of Chris (more office space,extra funding and Chairmanship of a few commitees !) not a single reply.Nothing from Gareth,Jaz or even Jack Stone to name but three who seem to think that maintaining the status quo is a good option.Says it all really!

[Ted]

Setting aside the pro/anti arguments there is much in this saga which reflects badly on the Conservative Party and its leadership

- We campaigned on a manifesto which committed us to remaining with EPP-ED until next Euro Elections. Leaving would have broken a committment made to our voters and to a group of parties, with which we might difffer on some aspects, but whom on the whole we look to as allies in economic & other matters. We have jepardised our relationshuip with Angela Merkel and other important politicians across Europe.

- DC campaigned on a promise to leave the EPP and made it clear this was within months - that he intended to break the committment we had made with our EPP & ED partners. He has not delivered this so has broken a pledge he made to me and others when we voted for him.

- our potential allies in Poland and elsewhere have been made to look foolish yet again by our actions. We led them to believe we were going to renege on EPP agreement and they indicated willingness to join us. We dropped them in it by changing our minds and left the impression thats because they weren't good enough allies.

- DC has made his most loyal MEPs look idiots and the less loyal crow how well they've done. Bad politics, bad people management.

So over a period of less than a year we have managed to let down our friends in like minded parties who are more Europhile, our friends in like minded parties who share our scepticism/realism and our leadership has reneged on an undertaking to some of our MEPs and much of the membership.

Would you ever do a deal with this party?
Would you trust this party?

Fox & Cameron were ill advised to break our committments to the EPP-ED - they should have accepted the Conservative Party did not easily renege on manifesto committments and alliance but planned how to envigorate the ED and more actively display our European views while keeping the pretty loose alliance IDS & Howard put in place.

Cameron was ill advised to make the EPP pledge then move Fox off foreign affairs as it was the good doctor who was setting up the successor grouping. If he had left Fox in charge then the pledge would have been fulfillled or failed months ago.

I am not a Europhobe and though a sceptic cannot see why we should go out of our way to upset the Christian Democrat centre-right across Europe by these uneccessary maneouverings, Cameron could have sorted out the Helmer issue, he could have sat down with Merkel at one of the events he hasn't bothered going to that brought together centre right parties and taken up the issues we have with EPP failing to honour their committments to ED members.

Membership or otherwise of EPP doesn't really matter - the UKippers and Better off Outers might think its THE most important thing but I'm more concerned about our economic, educational, health, environmental and defence policies. But I do I care that we as a Party have friends in the rest of the world for support when we need it in pushing our international agenda.

We have announcede our intention to keep to our committments on EPP-ED and then leave. There can be no more wiggling, lets do what we say. But let's do in a manner so we can repair some of the damage this has done in estranging friends on both Europhile & Eurosceptic sides in Europe.

David Cameron has personally to work at making this happen - he has caused great damage so needs to repair it. I cannot fully trust what he says to me as a member ( the email was a laughable spin), many of his colleagues are understanderbly unhappy, many of our foreign friends are unhappy. Sort it.

[malcolm]

As so often Ted,possibly the best post I have read on the subject.

[Denis Cooper]

At the time of the last European elections very few of the voters even knew that the Tory MEPs had been sitting with people who wish to extinguish our country, and even fewer were aware of the pledge buried in the manifesto that Tory MEPs would continue to sit with people who wish to extinguish our country.

Now many more are aware of that situation, and they are aware that Cameron promised to rectify it by withdrawing the Tory MEPs from that group, in months not years, and they are aware that he's broken that pledge. Many others will be vaguely aware that he's broken some pledge, without knowing the details.

He's got his new agreement with the Czechs from 2009 on; now he should keep his agreement with the members who elected him and take the MEPs out of the EPP to sit as independents until 2009.

Pathetic excuses like "It would have meant sitting next to figures such as Mrs Mussolini and Robert Kilroy-Silk." simply will not wash. Anyway, couldn't they choose seats a bit further down the row?!

[deborah]

I agree, Denis.
At the very least he should openly and positively support any MEPs who want to follow their convictions and leave the EPP now.

[Chad]

" We campaigned on a manifesto which committed us to remaining with EPP-ED until next Euro Elections."

Sure, but you also campaigned for lower taxes in the 2005 general election manifesto. You can't pick and choose which pledges you should stick by from a previous leader.

[Chad]

..and which one of the two (EPP or lower taxes) are the public likely to remember and connect with most?

[Goldie]

This is extremely important. It's the first real decision Cameron had to make.

The way he's handled this therefore offers the best glimpse of what kind of leader he would be as Prime Minister.

[Christina]

So he'll lock up hoodies and throw away the key then?

[Ted]

Chad

We lost the 2005 elecion so no contract was made ("as a government we would..." doesn't apply the day after the election if you lose)
In Europe Manifesto we promised what our MEPs would di if they were elected, they were so the manifesto committments appy.

Denis

A promise is a promise - DC made a promise to us, we as a party made a promise to our friends and voters. Both could not be kept. Breaking promises breaks other things - DC & Hague have managed to "keep" both promises by fudging the promises, no one happy except a few Europhile MEPs. In fact they have broken both in real terms.

Goldie

A rare agreement - it was a major test, I am much less happy I voted for DC because he managed to pull a lose-lose from possibility of a win-win.

[william]

Deva and Van Orden have already accepted the compromise, and Callanan, Kamall and Heaton-Harris (selected in Daventry) are all A-listers with a firm eye on their future Westminster careers.

That leaves Syed, Hannan and Helmer to fly the flag of British independence - if they dare.

The European Parliament is a structure whereby the Members are paid so much that the threat of expulsion guarantees their silence. They could not possibly find so much money anywhere else.

That means that for the most part they're in the system too - apart from Helmer who's made of the strongest stuff. Nothing would stop Roger Helmer from fighting for his country.

We have one man who stood for and stands for what he and we believe in, no matter how much he stands to lose. Otherwise risk-taking is apparently not in vogue with our political representatives.

But even with just one, the flame of freedom flickers and is not yet extinguished. Our new emblem should be a lit candle.

[Chad]

"We lost the 2005 elecion so no contract was made "

Sorry Ted,
I knew that was coming! Yes, you did, you won 196 MP's based on that agenda, just as the MEP's were elected on the EPP agenda.

Stop picking an choosing what should be kept from Howard and what Cameron can 'change' to fit your argument.

Cameron was voted in on a blank sheet 'change' agenda, and to many of us, that means, er, change.

[Derek]

If Dan Hannan were to quit the EPP alone I feel it would be a futile gesture as he would end up outside the party. This would be a great loss to our cause.

Grand gestures are pointless. His threat to leave was only to try to put pressure on the leadership. It was a gamble which has not worked.

[Ted]

Chad

Sorry party manifestos are specific to elections - the Euro election wasn't for a government it was for our party's plans for next 5 years as MEPs in European Parliament. The committments we made still stand. We can change policies but we need to recognise these break manifesto committments.

The 2005 General Election Manifesto was for both a Conservative Government (The Party Manifesto) and for individiual MPs - their constituency election addresses. My MP, Andrew Murrison, was anti-Iraq War. I voted for him knowing that he disagreed with the Party policy. There is no committment from a losing manifesto (as UKIP must be pleased to recognise)

[Chad]

"(as UKIP must be pleased to recognise)"

:-) Indeed!

[william]

Yes Derek I see your point, but if they all went together as one loaf rather than one crumb at a time, the deselection might not be implemented in practice, and anyway three years is a long time.

The problem is that 30% of Conservative voters will now feel disenfranchised. How will they be made to feel that supporting the Conservatives is achieving their objectives?

If Hannan stands outside the EPP and starts forming a new group, it will facilitate the situation in 2009 towards a genuine new grouping rather than a pretend one. Hannan or others will have three years to build an alternative career at Westminster or other, if the deselection is forced through.

If he and others are deselected, the 2009 Euro election will be focused greatly on the selection of independence MEP's and the eviction of pro-EPP ones. There will definitely not be another rerun of Cameron and Hague's eurofudges. The issue will not have been allowed to go to sleep, which it will otherwise.

It depends how important you think this issue is. For me there is no doubt that Hannan should leave the EPP and join Helmer. For him it's obviously a tough personal decision as well as a political one. And I would not blame him for giving up the fight. If he did fight on, I would have endless respect for him and any others, who are prepared to take risks with their own futures to fight for ours.

[Ted]

Chad

Add that I recognise DC had endorsement from the party to change. So he could say to EPP "sorry, I'm going to break our promises", could have told voters "we were wrong to put this in our manifesto" - but we Conservatives must recognise that breaking promises, breaking agreements every couple of years means we aren't trustworthy partners.

He didn't fulfil the meaning of either our party's committment or his pledge. Ken Clarke etc might be happy but did yesterday improve our relationship with Merkel? Did it improve our relationship with the Government of Poland?

Worst of worst worlds, but pulls wool over Michael White & fellow scriibblers eyes to be presented as a victorious compromise.

[Simon Chapman]

Further to what Ted’s been saying. Our Editor is right to say that Team Cameron has run a very effective news management campaign over the last 24 hours. A further example of the thought and planning that went into this is that today our Association agent & I – and presumably lots of other Conservatives – received a 2-page letter from Messrs. Hague & Cameron explaining the deal.

But Team Cameron will be doing DC an immense disservice if it kids itself that it has done anything other than win a breathing space. The decision announced yesterday means that the leadership still has to deliver the goods in the form of a new group in 2009. If that doesn’t happen, the wranglings of the last few months, which by and large have been conducted temperately and in private, will be repeated all over again but almost certainly in public and intemperately. And all that in the run up to the European elections.

And possibly not just European elections. May 2009 now is the most likely general election date. Holding the general election on the same day as the European election does lots of good things if you are Gordon Brown. It helps get the Labour vote out. It motivates UKIP, who are always at their highest electoral success in European elections. And it may be that this unfinished business will have flared up. The heat might look as if it’s out on the surface – but if the fire has been allowed to smoulder for 3 years there could be a sudden inferno.

The comments by the pro-EPP rump that Tim reported at the top of this thread make it clear that they think they have the measure of their man, and that this deal can be un-picked by 2009. It seems unlikely that they will wish to be very energetic on behalf of the new Movement for European Reform (MER).

And that’s the key to it. The Party needs to act quickly to demonstrate that MER is going to be a meaningful and effective group. My letter from Hague & Cameron ends with these words “We want to win the arguments, build support, and get things done. This is the start.” They need to deliver on that now, not wait until 2009.

That means that both DC & Hague need to make some serious foreign policy speeches, setting out their views on the role Britain and a reformed EU have to play in the 21st century – and on what a reformed EU will look like. If they are to win the arguments, they need to start making them now. Liam Fox, who has ministerial experience in the Foreign Office and is the party’s most original thinker on Foreign Affairs, needs to be deployed on this as well to help win the arguments and to use his contacts to build an alliance across Europe. Our relationship with our Polish counterparts will need some work. And DC ought to meet Angela Merkel.

At the same time, those who relied on the argument that the party had made a manifesto pledge to stay in the EPP until 2009 need to be reminded that the same now applies the other way, and to be firmly disabused of any notion they might have that this is a deal that can be unpicked. DC wrote today in the Telegraph: “the agreement to form a new group is not an aspiration, it is a guarantee – and it will be delivered.”

I count myself amongst those who had hoped for an early withdrawal. That has not happened. However, the creation of the MER presents a real opportunity to take forward the objective of turning the EU into a vibrant flexible alliance of nation states fit for the challenges of the 21st century. We need to encourage the party leadership in this ambitious proposal and help them make it a reality.

[mirthios]

Can we get this clear, please. The issue here is not WHETHER we should leave the EPP. That issue was decided during the leadership campaign.

Mr Cameron promised us unequivocally that we would do so within months and he lied. As Sir Humphrey might say, I realise that that is a difficult concept for a politician to understand (as is obvious from many of the comments above), but what else can you call telling the opposite of the truth?

Cameron has lost it - the plot, his integrity and the next General Election - all in one go. Farewell.

[Henry Mayhew]

The Europe issue is over for now. On to substantive issues of domestic policy, in particular, the 40% of children born out of wedlock who are headed for lesser "life chances". Any thoughts on this rather thorny one Dave?

[Simon Chapman]

Henry,

You are off-thread. See you at Tebbit on Hoodies

[James Maskell]

At the beginning of this thread it was said that the eurosceptic vote lost Thanet South last year. Thats rubbish. That result I feel was down more to the Lib Dem performance than that of UKIP.

Cameron wont remove the whip from the Tory MEPs who walk from the EPP. How contradictory would that be? Cameron signs a deal with the Czechs saying he will leave the MEPs and then punish MEPs who quit the EPP early? I know he doesnt want the Party to be split but splitting the Party over something it clearly agrees on is wierd.

[christina speight]

I'm glad that Jack Stone (1355) agrees with my view that "Spineless lot the Tory eurosceptics and led by a LIAR assisted by a Hague-traitor ".

All the wriggling and all the smooth-talking cannot get away from the fact that the Conservative leader LIED and broke his promise

[Andrew Woodman]

Cameron has nothing to do with the whip though James. The shadow cabinet have obviously been told to repeat this phrase parrot like 'The question of the Whip in the European Parliament is not a matter for the Party in Westminster.'

This leaves Mr Europhile Kirkhope in charge of the whip and I believe nothing would give him greater pleasure than to get rid of Dan Hannan and the other dissenters.

[James Maskell]

Hmmm. Thats true Andrew, though Im sure Cameron has greater authority than Kirkthorpe...

[Andrew Woodman]

He certainly doesn't exercise it in Europe James.

What concerns me is where does this leave Roger Helmer. If he's left out in the cold for the next 3 years, then there will be an enormous amount of bad feeling in the East Midlands (there is a fair amount now).

IMO, an option should be offered to the MEP's to resign from the EPP but remain recognised Conservative MEP's and part of the delegation. I fear the option won't be on the table though.

[Chris Gillibrand]

"If they hadn't nicked Liam Fox's point about leaving the EPP, which got him a cheap clap at conference, they wouldn't have got themselves into such a bother."

And Mr Cameron would not be leader today. And its not a cheap clap.

[deborah]

"Our Editor is right to say that Team Cameron has run a very effective news management campaign over the last 24 hours. A further example of the thought and planning that went into this is...."

Yeah, the news management is great. But actually I was hoping for a little more than spin. I just wish Team Cameron would put as much thought and planning into making that difference they talk so much about.

I know, people will say we have to get into power first, then we can make the difference. The problem is, what's the point in power if you've lost sight of your principles along the way.

[Jack Stone]

Christine I didn`t agree with you. I think Hague and Cameron have been brilliant in what they have done. I was just hoping that we had seen the back of you. I don`t know why you take such an interest in a party you so obviously hate.
You are your like are those responsible for us being in opposition and for our country having the most incompetant and corrupt government we have had in living memory.

[Anoneumouse]

Henry Mayhew wrote
The Europe issue is over for now. On to substantive issues of domestic policy

So list domestic policy that is not affected by EU competence!

Being a smoker of Benson and Hedges (yes B&H, you are never alone when you make a stand) for over 40 years, I feel confident that I can hold my breath whilst you list them.
.

[David Sergeant]

All this blogging about Europe when we know electors arn't bothered. They are interested in far more and just think we are mad getting so excited over such a minor issue. Come on, Cameron didn't lie - he made a promise which, in the end, a compromise was seen as the best way.

So all the bloggers saying Cameron lied are going to vote for another party because they don't lie! All UKIP does is send nutters to Brussels and dissipates sceptic representation and pro-Europe Lib/Dems and Labour to Westminster instead of Tories. With people like you about no wonder we have a pro-Europe Labour government in power.

[mirthios]

Dave,

"Come on, Cameron didn't lie - he made a promise which, in the end, he didn't keep."

If you're honestly comfortable with that, great. Many, many of us aren't.

[Anoneumouse]

There is an adage in the marketing world. One directly dissatisfied customer, represents 10 wary potential customers.

In other words, as a sociable activist I have influence too.

.

[Simon Chapman]

"What concerns me is where does this leave Roger Helmer. If he's left out in the cold for the next 3 years, then there will be an enormous amount of bad feeling in the East Midlands (there is a fair amount now).

IMO, an option should be offered to the MEP's to resign from the EPP but remain recognised Conservative MEP's and part of the delegation. I fear the option won't be on the table though."

A good question Andrew. My guess is that Kirkhope has been told to bring Roger back into the fold. What will that mean? I can see Roger being restored to the party whip - but I cannot see him agreeing to rejoin the EPP. Which begs this question: if Roger has the whip restored but is allowed to remain outside the EPP, why shouldn't other MEPs be allowed to join him?

As you say, we in the East Midlands are watching this with considerable interest.

[Richard North]

David Sergeant 19:20 ... "With people like you about no wonder we have a pro-Europe Labour government in power."

You mean, with Cameron as PM, we wouldn't have a "pro-Europe" government in power?

[greg]

Good to see that securing c220 parliamentary seats is the height of Anoneumouse's ambitions!

[Denis Cooper]

Ted, a promise is indeed a promise, but in May 2004 there were two inconsistent promises made to the British electorate. First there was the promise put on the leaflets delivered through the letterboxes and broadcast to the living rooms of twenty-odd million households, which said that the Tory MEPs would be "putting Britain first". Second there was the promise buried on page 24 of the manifesto, seen by perhaps a few tens of thousands of voters at most, which said that the Tory MEPs would be allied with people who don't even want Britain to exist.

I know which one I think should take priority - no contest, really.

[Anoneumouse]

Second adage, "Propaganda works"

My social circle, delivers my message to their social circle.

Margot sweetheart, eat your heart out.

.

[william]

'IMO, an option should be offered to the MEP's to resign from the EPP but remain recognised Conservative MEP's and part of the delegation.'

If this had been on offer, the venom would have come out of this by now, even with the promise broken. If it is not offered, then the war of words will continue, and 30% of Conservative voters (at least) will not be sure where their loyalties lie.

I don't see how that is brilliant news management or Party management. We still need to win elections, as well as please owners of the media.

Hannan has yet to speak, and millions of voters will be listening to what he says and does, and measuring the reaction of the Party's brilliant managers to the position he adopts.

It will keep the 30% BOO Conservative vote interested if Hannan and the others come out of the EPP. There are about 2.5 million people to keep happy, maybe more. I wonder if Party managers still think they can safely ignore the opinions of these voters.

[Johnny Smythe]

I'm afraid that William (01:14) holds out too much hope that the 'H-block' (Hannan, Heaton-Harris et al) will ride to the rescue. Chris H-H is a selected candidate for a Westminster seat, as such he now has to deal not only with the MEP Whips but also the Chief Whip in Westminster. It is a brave man that takes on Patrick Mcloughlin. If rumours are true - and I stress 'if' - then Hannan too is secretly on the A-list or at least has ambitions of turning up on the green benches and that puts him in the same predicament. And for all those who talk of Cameron being a 'liar', well maybe so on this issue but I sat at an MEP selection meeting back in 1998 and clearly heard Dan Hannan swear blind that he would never head to Westminster - a 'promise' that has been reiterated many times since. Lets face it all concerned - plus their promises - in this sorry and messy affair have come out badly. And we wonder why voter turn-out is so low?

[Francis]

Please note that more people care about health and education as opposed to the European Union. We have a problem at the moment in that we seem very narrow minded, conservatives only care about immigration ad Europe. This is distasteful to voters, most of whom don't know what the EPP is and they don't care.

It wouyld be a better idea if members of the conservative party and other readers of this blog talked more about health and education, perhaps things like quality of housing and transport as well.

[william]

Francis there are other threads where we discuss the other issues.

I still think that Hague threatening our MEP's with deselection if they dare to speak up in the Euro parliament about corruption is disgusting. If he as much as lays a finger on Roger Helmer or Hannan, I would expect his own Constituents to call him to a meeting and explain that his own position cannot be considered as secure in such circumstances.

We cannot have Conservative leadership actively promoting corruption by bullying brave and principled MEP's into silence. Richmond Conservatives have a role to play.